Pre Remington Marlin 1895, Is this desirable?
- Thread starter BurlewLLB
- Start date
Originality. Marlin made them better. When Remington began production they were plagued with issues, from quality control to a workforce that was improperly trained in how to manufacture lever guns. I bought a Remlin only to find the barrel and sights to be improperly indexed, meaning everything was tipped to the 1 o’clock position. How this gun made it out of the factory I don’t know. Add to that all the edges on the gun were sharp, leading me to believe they didn’t even tumble-finish the parts prior to final assembly. The new Ruger-made guns are supposed to be far superior in fit and finish.
Lee Enfield
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Republic of Alberta
The 336 and 1895 remlin's generally had higher grade wood, too bad every single one I've seen the inletting is terribly wrong to a truely pathetic level.
Generally the inletting was so terribly off centre that it looked like it was poorly refinished.
That's where the marlin dark series came from - hiding the poor fitment of metal and wood.
Also the Remlins are notorious for feeding problems.
Note that the early Remlin guns manufactured in North Haven, were generally better than the ones marked as Ilion.
But the North Haven guns built during/after the layoffs had many reported problems.
If you look at the 1894 series, remington changed the bolt and extractor geometry approx 3 times, during the fairly short period they manufactured them.
Better fit and finish. Better reputation for not breaking. I’d take one over the new junk anytime.
